Not offhand, but you could probably generate some from polygonal models (e.g., by converting to PN triangles or subdivision surfaces). I suspect there isn't much call for Bezier models, because if NURBS is more flexible for high-order surfaces.

friedlinguini wrote:Not offhand, but you could probably generate some from polygonal models (e.g., by converting to PN triangles or subdivision surfaces). I suspect there isn't much call for Bezier models, because if NURBS is more flexible for high-order surfaces.

maybe i should switch to nurbs then.. im new in 3d graphics.. searched and i dont find any place with bezier patch models (except utah teapot).. is there better with nurbs surface models.. some repository?

such curve-patch-models occupy far less space in memory than fat triangle ones -

If you are interested in nurbs patch models, then you might be interested in looking at Animation:Master. A 3D animation software that models using nurbs patches. You will find the A:M users community here: https://www.hash.com/forums/. There is a fair number of patch models available. Plus you can make your own.

...Sometimes. NURBS is fine for things like designing mint-condition man-made objects (where smooth, curved, and shiny is important). If you have a lot of geometric detail (nature scenes, scanned 3D objects, etc.), then it's hard to argue that a pixel-sized NURBS patch is more efficient to store than a pixel-sized triangle, and it's those high-detail scenes where storage is a problem.

One thing to bear in mind is that you don't necessarily need your test models to consist solely of whatever native primitives you use. NURBS surfaces can be converted to triangles. Subdivision surfaces can be converted to NURBS. Triangle meshes can be treated as subdivision surfaces.